President Barack Obama has said he wants to shut down the telephone surveillance program that has been the subject of intense controversy since it was revealed in top-secret documents published last summer. The US government will stop maintaining its database of telephone call "metadata," which includes all numbers dialed in the US as well as their duration and other data.

"Earlier this year, I announced a transition that would end the Section 215 bulk telephony metadata program as it previously existed and that we would establish a mechanism to preserve the capabilities we need without the government holding this bulk metadata," Obama said in a statement today. "I did so to give the public greater confidence that their privacy is appropriately protected, while maintaining the tools our intelligence and law enforcement agencies need to keep us safe."

A fact sheet lays out the details of the changes, and they are significant. The data itself will still exist in the hands of the phone companies, as it always has (it's the same data on your telephone bill), but it can only be queried when the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) approves requests for specific numbers. That's the difference between the government going to a judge and saying "We'd like to see the metadata for 555-123-4567 and all of his/her contacts" and the government already having all those contacts in its own database with no supervision for individual searches.

Further Reading

The queries will also be limited to "two hops" out rather than three hops. As Ars editor Sean Gallagher explained last year, the "three hops" limit isn't much of a limit at all. And the "two hop" limit means intelligence agencies will still be able to get all the contacts of all the contacts of suspected persons. That might not be the whole country, but it's a lot of people.

The idea of taking the phone database out of the hands of the government and leaving it with the phone companies was one of the key recommendations of the surveillance review panel convened by Obama.

There are still a few reasons for concern, however. First, there is still no public advocate at the FISC, as reformers have recommended. As long as it's a one-sided, secret process, there's still a risk of FISC being essentially a rubber-stamp court. There is also hedging language in the president's proposal, stating that queries must go through a judge "absent an emergency situation." Finally, if the actual searching is going to be done by the telephone companies and not by the NSA, there are real questions about how that could be done in a way that is effective, safe, and subject to real oversight.

In order for these proposals to take effect, Congress will have to pass legislation. In the meantime, the Department of Justice will be asking for re-authorization of the program with "substantial modifications." There are already competing surveillance bills in Congress; some would shut down the program completely, while others would allow the intel agencies more leniency than Obama would. According to the New York Times, a draft bill now being talked about in the House would require the NSA to submit specific subpoenas, but without judicial approval.

Further Reading

Despite all those caveats, the president's admission that the database needs to end in its current form still seems like a watershed moment. Obama's first responses to criticisms about surveillance were defensive. In early press conferences, he defended the integrity of the people working for US intelligence agencies and condemned the Snowden leaks as both damaging and the product of "sensational" press coverage.

Over time, though, the continued revelations of spying on allies, enemies, and Americans alike have made some elements of US spying appear out of control even to the staunchest surveillance hawks. There has been a sea change in the politics of this issue over the last year. In some ways, even after almost a year of steady revelations, the massive phone database still seems to be the most stunning and troubling of all that was revealed. Today, 10 months after it hit the front page of newspapers worldwide, without support from the president and with dwindling support in Congress, the "bulk telephony metadata" seems like it really is headed for the dustbin.

I wish they would address all the other issue, email, LOVEINT, tapping the internet/google/yahoo, etc, every report on this program said it was useless and it seems to me like the stink over it is, so they can get rid of it and say, there is an olive branch.

I can only hope that in future years the people of America look back on this time with the same sense of bewilderment that I look back at the days of "McCarthyism" and un-American Activities investigations - Paranoia and power gone mad to further its own interests under a veil of patriotism.

For those of you who believe the NSA will alter or curtail any of their surveillance activity, you're gonna have a bad time.

Pandora's box is open, and it is just naive to assume that because some internet people get angry and new "laws" are passed, that the NSA or anyone else is just going to forget that they have the world's communication at their fingertips.

It is the pinnacle of intelligence gathering, unachieveable but dreamed about for thousands of years by every general and king and field commander, and it isn't going away period.

If he's serious it's going to be interesting watching all the republicans who are also anti-surveillance tie themselves in knots in order to satisfy their usual, rather stringent requirement of not allowing anything that might make him look good politically.

Edit: No, I am not naive enough to take the president or any other politician seriously on this issue. The capability now exists and they are going to take advantage of it no matter what the public says or does.

If he's serious it's going to be interesting watching all the republicans who are also anti-surveillance tie themselves in knots in order to satisfy their usual, rather stringent requirement of not allowing anything that might make him look good politically.

Edit: No, I am not naive enough to take the president or any other politician seriously on this issue.

You might have missed the troll link above that took care of that already - they are painting it as "cosmetic" changes. That way, they can bitch that he's not really doing anything of substance, while going along with the plan since "eh, it won't have any effect so why not?"

I'm sorry, call me crazy, but I do not believe this is a huge victory, although it is to some extent.

They seem to be changing a narrow slice of the overall pie, but there remains other "metadata" that has not been discussed at all. They keep talking specifically about phones here, but what about internet communications? What about the spying loopholes, where one country does the others dirty work?

From what I understand, they do not need the phone "metadata" in order to know you more intimately than your spouse.

But I guess with this announcement they will be closing that data center in Utah, right? Oh, no? Hmm...

If the government wants my trust on these issues, they are going to have to earn it back, and until these secret courts are eliminated, it's simply not going to happen.

Edit- I think this action is for the more simple-minded among us. This has more to do with public relations than any sort of actual meaningful change.

If he's serious it's going to be interesting watching all the republicans who are also anti-surveillance tie themselves in knots in order to satisfy their usual, rather stringent requirement of not allowing anything that might make him look good politically.

Edit: No, I am not naive enough to take the president or any other politician seriously on this issue.

You might have missed the troll link above that took care of that already - they are painting it as "cosmetic" changes. That way, they can bitch that he's not really doing anything of substance, while going along with the plan since "eh, it won't have any effect so why not?"

All tied up neatly in Fox talking points.

Ugh. Yeah I missed that. Come to think of it they probably have contingency plans already thought out for dismissing any positive thing their political enemies might say or do.

Who cares about the phone metadata? Are they doing something about that in order to pretend the much worse things didn't happen? Seriously when they tap all internet content, and keyword search all phone content, metadata collection is a red herring.

I can't classify as even a step in the right direction. Heck I would say it is glancing in the right direction. But I'll take anything at this point.

That last sentence is what makes all of this so real and depressing: we have gotten so desperate as a citizenry for control over the abuse that even the most pathetic of petty token gestures are looking good to us. It's so sad that we've gotten this far down, but I have no way I can think of or propose to fix it--short of an honest to gods revolution where we throw down the government entirely and start from scratch. As nice a pipe dream as that may be, it's never going to happen.

He's still referencing section 215 specifically. That's a dodge. It could go on under a different program.

More importantly, it completely ignores that another three-letter agency (the DEA) has been getting the data from at least one telecom (AT&T), with no judicial review. Nothing in this proposal addresses that in any way. See http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/dr ... ss&emc=rss

Other highlights of that program are 1) AT&T holds data back to 1987, which shows that having the telecoms hold the data can actually be more invasive, not less. 2) The data that the DEA gets without a warrant includes cell phone location data, unlike the NSA's section 215 program. 3) The DEA has concealed their program from judicial review by using parallel construction to invent an alternative narrative of the investigation to present in court.

Why is all the coverage allowing the government to focus in on this one narrow program, missing the forest for the trees? Any solution here needs to regulate all government conduct, not just the NSA and especially not just section 215. It's really irresponsible to ignore the rest of the story.

(We also really need to look at what the telecoms are allowed to do with the data themselves, but I suppose one thing at a time.)

Obama says, "I did so to give the public greater confidence that their privacy is appropriately protected". WOW! Really? Nice to see Obama hasn't stopped lying. The only reason he's pushing for an end to it is because this is the mid-term elections and the Democrats are in major trouble. Between President Obama and the Democrats currently in congress, not a single damned one of them have come out against this NSA spying and it has sank the Democratic Party.

He should have called for the end to this program before Edward Snowden leaked details about the program, not AFTER THE FACT. I've said it before and I'll say it again, "Obama is the biggest horses ass on the face of this planet".

The time to change is before everyone else discovers what you're doing, not AFTER they discover it.

The phone metadata was one of the more harmless programs the NSA has been running. I see this more as appeasement than a reversal on the NSA's broad authority to pretty well do what it wants until it gets caught doing something unpopular (mainly because people misunderstood the headlines)

I hope this is a small acknowledgement on Obama's part that public opinion is not on his side on this issue.

We've had 9 months of steady releases (some of which we could have done without, like reports about the NSA spying on other countries, which is what they are supposed to do), and, after all this time, there is still no evidence that the phone metadata program did anything of substance to maintain or increase the security of the country.

Why does the NSA get two hops? Shouldn't they search through the records of the requested number determine who in that list is of interest and then request their number. This process should be repeated as long as it takes to get where they need to go. This keeps the investigation focused on its target, protects the privacy of the innocent individuals the person of interest contacted and reduces the overall data the NSA has access to at any given point.

The only reason he's pushing for an end to it is because this is the mid-term elections and the Democrats are in major trouble.

Maybe so, but I'll take it. It continues to amaze me that the Democrats (mainly, but not exclusively) don't seem to understand the bipartisan hatred of these programs. My representative recently conducted an issues poll and of the thousands of responses just from my district, 89% said they disappoved of the surveillance. I think that "the will of the people" is pretty clear on this one.

Americans only believe in one thing, that government needs to stay out of our privacy and to respect the constitution of this country. Repeal The Patriot Act and all unwarrantless surveilance. End the secret courts (yeah, this means FISA). Maybe then we'll vote to re-elect you as our representatives.

Again, it sounds like they are playing from the Online Covert Handbook. He keeps on talking about changes, but yet no formal charges have been brought against the people responsible for the agencies running these programs. As long as these people, James Clapper, Keith Alexander, and Michael Hayden are free, and have no fear of prosecution, the next group of people to take their place will have no incentive to want to stay within the boundaries of the law.

All of this is a misdirection of the executive branch, he's pissing on you and telling you it's rain. Actions speak louder than words, so lets get some federal indictments against these people. Once that happens, then I start to have faith in his words. Every action the executive branch has taken in the past 10 years has been to protect these programs. They set up an internal check to locate and remove any persons that would object to these programs. In an email released by Greenwald, you have an analysis with the NSA talking about how cool it is they get more data then they ask for, and how it lets them do and discover things they hadn't considered before. Information is power, and people just don't give up that power because someone else happens to be unhappy. NO, they lie, cheat and steal to maintain it.

Until there are consequences for the traitors that are running these programs, there will be no incentive to change; remember their playbook and the 4 D's

Disrupt, Deny, Degrade and Deceive.

Don't let yourself be deceived, and don't let all this talk disrupt the messages coming from Greenwald as he releases the documents obtained by Snowden. My guess they are making a play so when more releases come out, they can say "That's all in the past, it's not worth your time to think about, because things are different now."

I'm still struggling to comprehend why there needs to be a legislative bill ending the program instead of an executive order. Is it a funding thing? A way to sneak in more programs as part of the language of the bill? Is it his passive-aggressive way of saying "we're going to keep doing it until you make it against the rules because otherwise we look weak?"

How many of you down-voters did so because of the mere mention of Fox News, instead of actually reading the article?

I didn't downvote it, and I think the he has a point, but the coverage is pretty shallow. And who is this guy, why is his opinion more relevant than any other person? He's not a current judge, he was never a federal judge, he has had no direct interactions with the programs in question.

If I'm going to be directed to someone's opinions, I want them to have something interesting and novel to say, or I want them to be a subject matter expert. Neither appears to be true here. If I want to read opinions from random people, some of whom I happen to agree with, I can stick to the comments here.